Aberdeen FC vs. Heart of Midlothian FC - More Markets

Platform comparison

Market context

Aberdeen host Heart of Midlothian in the Scottish Premiership, and the “more markets” contract is trading against a very thin market signal: the crowd-implied probability is **0% YES**, which is consistent with a contract that has not yet attracted visible participation rather than a settled view on the football itself. That makes cross-checks against traditional pricing more important than usual, because sportsbook and model-based views can move sharply once line-ups, late team news, and market makers appear.

Historically, this fixture has been close enough that a blank probability should be read cautiously. FootyStats’ aggregate head-to-head data shows Aberdeen with 17 wins, Hearts with 15, and 10 draws across 42 meetings, while another recent H2H feed puts it at 17 Hearts wins, 13 draws, and 17 Aberdeen wins[2][13]. Recent form also leans towards Hearts on some datasets, with FootyStats listing Aberdeen’s recent league record at 4 wins, 1 draw, 5 losses versus Hearts at 6 wins, 2 draws, 2 losses[2]. In comparable Aberdeen-Hearts meetings, low-scoring outcomes have been common enough to matter for derivative markets: recent scorelines include 1-0 Aberdeen in November 2025 and 0-0 earlier in 2025[7][8].

The main catalysts are team sheets, injuries, and any late adjustment to starting line-ups before kick-off, because those are the variables most likely to create divergence between sportsbook lines, model probabilities, and the current zero-priced prediction market. Live match pages confirm the game is scheduled for 1 August and already in progress/queued on major trackers, so traders should watch whether the market re-prices around confirmed selections and whether the pre-match side or totals markets move first[1][15][17]. If sportsbook consensus had already settled on a clear edge, a 0% YES on the contract would look like a data-gap rather than a disagreement; at present, the contract appears far less informative than the broader football market[1][15].

Sources: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5

Methodology

This page is a comparison snapshot: one live quote, four reference venues with their key attributes, and a single execution path — every trade button routes to PolyGram, which mirrors the Polymarket order book directly.

Resolution & payout

At resolution the UMA oracle takes over: a proposer posts the outcome with a bond, any token holder can dispute within two hours. Without dispute the result is accepted and the smart contract distributes USDC instantly.

On Kalshi (CFTC-regulated) resolution runs through their in-house clearing engine in USD. Betfair Exchange settles after match end in the account's local currency. Manifold pays no cash — only its in-platform "mana" currency.

FAQ

What's the difference between YES and NO shares?

A YES share pays $1.00 if the event happens, $0 otherwise. A NO share pays $1.00 if the event doesn't happen. The market price between 0¢ and 100¢ is the implied probability.

What does Polymarket cost to trade?

Polymarket itself charges 0% — the only cost is the Polygon network fee, typically under $0.01 per transaction. Off-chain venues like Kalshi or Betfair charge 2-7% commission.

How fast are USDC deposits?

Polygon credits deposits after 12 confirmations — usually under 30 seconds. Withdrawals follow the same path and land back in your wallet within minutes.

Do I need to KYC for this market?

On Polymarket directly, no — it's wallet-based. Intermediary brokers like PolyGram trigger KYC only above $1,500 of lifetime trading volume; under that you trade pseudonymously with a single wallet address.

How reliable are the quoted odds?

The YES/NO percentages are the live mid-prices of the Polymarket order book. On deep markets they move every few seconds; on thinner ones you'll see short plateaus.